Needham Select Board, 5/26/26

Thank you for watching.

Recording in progress.

Calling to order the select board meeting for Tuesday, May 26. This meeting is being broadcast by the Needham Channel for the Town's YouTube channel and via Zoom and is being recorded for publication and later viewing by the Needham Observer. I think I saw Peter. There he is. And the Needham Local. if anyone else is recording now is the time to tell the chair okay we're gonna start as we always do with public comment we have four tonight so we'll call first Zach Wallach to come up to the table have a seat you can use this microphone please introduce yourself and state your address we're going to keep comments to three minutes as always and just for everyone's edification this is not a Thank you, Madam Chair.

Excuse me. My name is Zach Wallach. I live at 36 Wilshire Park in Needham. I'm here tonight because I've been nominated to serve as an associate member of the ZBA, Zoning Board of Appeals. I understand that at least one member of this board has requested to discuss my appointment as a regular agenda item this evening as opposed to voting on my nomination by consent and given that I wanted to take the opportunity to say a few words to the board. I know I have three minutes, so I will be as judicious as I possibly can. Is there a timer so I can see where I'm at here? Thank you very much. I'm extremely grateful and thankful to have have been nominated for this position. It's a great opportunity to volunteer and give back to the community and the town, which I care so deeply about. I'm really, truly humbled to be considered for this role. I want to speak very briefly about who I am. I'm a third generation Needham resident.

My grandfather and grandmother moved to Woodbine Circle in the 1950s and then to Petrini Circle. where they raised my father and my father's four siblings. I grew up on Mark Tree Road and then Stratford Road where my parents still live. Now I live with my wife Amanda and our two daughters Chloe and Sydney. on Wilshire Park. When my wife and I were deciding where we wanted to move when we were leaving Boston back in late 2018, the answer to us was very obvious. We were going to move to Needham. They love the town. I love the town. My wife loves the town, and now our kids love the town. There's no better place to raise a family. Professionally, I'm a partner at Eckerd Siemens. The majority of my practice is dedicated to commercial litigation. I regularly appear before state and Federal Courts. I apologize I'm talking so fast. I see the timer in front of me. Handling a wide range of commercial disputes. A portion of my practice is also dedicated to representing

residential and commercial property owners in various zoning matters seeking zoning relief from various boards of appeals or on the converse appealing decisions of various zoning boards of appeals if my client has had a variance or request for a special permit denied. I think my professional experience combined with my knowledge of the town and my love for the town make me an ideal candidate for this board, for the ZBA, that is. The chair of the ZBA I understand has sent an email at least to some members of this board supporting my nomination and asking the board to approve it. It would really be an honor to serve in this role. It doesn't seem to me that it's my qualifications that are the reason that I've been placed on tonight's agenda. Given there's some apparent hesitation about my nomination, I did reach out to all of the board members to address any concerns that they had. I had some very productive conversations with two board members. I did not hear back from the other members.

I hope that that is because those members have no concerns about me or whatever concerns they had about my appointment have been resolved to the extent they have not been i will be here all evening and happy to answer any questions very, very briefly. I would like to address my advocacy during the MBTA zoning referendum. It's no secret that I was on. I have 30 more seconds.

Thank you.

It's no secret that I advocated on the no side of the referendum. My viewpoint differed from some on this board. That's obvious and that's okay. There has to be room for opposing viewpoints. and it's extremely important in my view not to mistake passionate advocacy for incivility. One can and I often do advocate passionately for positions that I believe in Pointed critiques and difficult questions do not indicate or signal incivility. In any event, this concern is not relevant to my Ability to serve on the ZBA. The ZBA is not a policymaking board. I will not be nor would I ever attempt to make policy on the ZBA. I will review the applications that come before me. I will apply the facts. I will look at the law. and I will make the decision that is mandated by the facts in the law. It's a quasi-judicial board. I am a lawyer. I do not view the ZBA as a policy-making body. It is not, period. I would very, very clearly uphold my obligations and duties on that board.

So in closing, I'm very humbled and honored to have been nominated for this board. I'm more than happy to answer any questions later on in the meeting to the extent there are any. And I look forward to being confirmed and serving on the ZBA. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Mr. Ross.

Sorry for talking so fast.

The next public comment will come from Olivia Hurlock. Hi, Olivia. Same thing, name and address, and then about three minutes. OK, thank you.

It's time, if you want to sit.

OK, great.

Yes, the pressure's on. OK. Thank you. My name is Olivia Herlock. I live at 100 Edgewater Drive. I've lived there for 31 years. I'm here tonight to comment on the campus at 128. The plans for campus at 128 filed with MEPA show clearly that the project will ultimately place a huge tax burden on Needham. as well as doing irreversible environmental damage to the Charles River watershed. What does that mean? This development, twice the size of Legacy Place, will add approximately 31,000 car trips per day on Route 135. this increase in traffic will necessitate land taking land by eminent domain to widen 135 in Dedham from a two-lane to a four-lane road

On the Needham side, this will require filling in conservation wetlands on both sides of the Charles River, abutting the 135 bridge, widening the 135 bridge. Widening 135 leading into Needham Town Center including possibly rebuilding the Needham the railroad bridge and augmenting our infrastructure for utilities and mutual aid. Who wins from all this? Maybe Dedham, but there are no tenants that have contracts for this development, so who knows what revenue will be generated. But Needham certainly loses. In fact, at a public Dedham Planning Board meeting last fall, Jessica Porter, the Vice Chair, stated, Don't tell anyone over there, but Needham's going to bear the brunt of all this. The 60 acres of pristine woodlands and wetlands will be completely eliminated, along with habitats for countless flora and fauna,

The topography is largely granite-based, sloping up towards 128. So the blasting that will be required along with subsequent stormwater drainage issues will likely impact the Charles River watershed, our shared resource. Will Dedham or the developer compensate Needham for the tax burden placed on our residents? And even if they're willing, is it worth the inevitable damage to our quality of life and the peace and enjoyment of our town? I urge you, our select board, to do all in your power to prevent this development from proceeding and I look forward to hearing the report from the town manager on the subject.

Thank you. okay our next public comment will come from Louise Miller speaking as a resident please join us and introduce yourself please state your address about three minutes okay

Smith, Louise Miller, 5 North Hill Avenue. I'm here to talk to you about the Pollard project specifically the financing of the Pollard three areas that are within the jurisdiction of the Select Board that I am hoping that you will look at and address over the next few months. The first one, first I want to say that, like, Select Board have fiduciary duty to taxpayers and that we have already talked about what and anticipated increase to tax burden might be for the taxpayers of Needham. So the first area is the PFA, the project financing agreement that is signed between the town and the MSBA. And I would ask that you review that very carefully because the MSBA in the project financing agreement does set forth what the reimbursement rate is for the town of Needham.

it also clearly sets forth what items are being reimbursed, what items are not being reimbursed. And to the extent that we are asking for taxpayers to foot 100% of the bill for certain items in the project, I think that it behooves all of us to understand what those items are and to make sure that those are things that should properly be paid for 100%. by the taxpayer. I know that we always talk about the net reimbursement from MSBA, but we also have an actual reimbursement and the net reimbursement is after all those other items for which the MSBA does not reimburse. The next area is something that you share with the Finance Committee, which is how policies, the financial policies of the town are set. We talk a lot about the 3% debt service within the general fund. We also talk about the 10%.

and I just want to point out that we do not have any policies with respect to CPA debt within that 10 percent or enterprise fund debt within that 10 percent. to the extent that we have CPA debt, CPA debt falls off the total debt service that does not result in a relief to the taxpayer because the amounts for instance that we collect for CPA stay the same. It's just that our debt service amounts change and it you know we now are using it still as part of the entire formula so we can end up increasing excluded debt to a higher degree and increasing taxpayers burden to a higher degree without a corresponding reduction because debt service went down if CPA debt service reduces. So that's a whole other area that I'm hoping you would have a chance to look at.

And I can see time is running out. But the third one is Debt Service Stabilization Fund. there is a policy for debt service stabilization fund which I think you have revised actually not that long ago to allow for reservation of Funds for New Growth. I would ask that you really look at that in the near future projects that are being planned, anticipated new growth. and Manor in which you could reserve out some of that new growth to reduce the increasing tax burden. And with respect to that, I would also offer that having a plan for that debt service stabilization fund going forward would be helpful. So looking at which years are going to be years when we have higher debt service than other years and then really using it

to try to level off the increases in the taxpayers' burden. those are my comments I am offering to help if you know you want to talk further about any of this or you know with whatever committees okay thank you

Okay. The last public comment that we're aware of is Dr. Steven Epstein. Come on down. Have a seat. Introduce yourself. Same basic instructions.

Know the rules. Thank you, Madam Chair. Good evening. I'm Dr. Steven Epstein. I live at 117 Richdale Road, and I'm a member of the Needham Board of Health. and I'm here to convey our board's concerns about a recent change in the state cannabis law and to urge the select board to take some action on that. Last month, the Governor signed Chapter 65 of the Acts of 2026, an act of modernizing the Commonwealth's Cannabis Laws. And under this act, limited delivery of recreational marijuana is now permitted in every municipality in Massachusetts by default. including towns like ours that through town meeting deliberately chose not to authorize retail establishments. So what became an opt-in is now effectively an opt-out. This does not affect medical cannabis. Town meeting was very clear about that, and nothing about the request that the Board of Health is making would change that. Medical delivery is protected. By state law, that continues.

What's at issue here is the recreational delivery. and our central problem with this is youth access. The CCC's regulations require at a counter, at a licensed retailer, to have age verification at the door, to have cameras. It's pretty strictly controlled. We kind of have some doubts about how reliably in practice, delivery after delivery, driver after driver, with hundreds of doorsteps, doors in the Commonwealth, how this is going to happen. They don't have trained staff or fixed cameras in the cars. A car in a driveway has none of it, and we expect the practical implications is going to be inconsistent ID checks, product reaching, adolescents in homes where parents aren't present. which creates a big enforcement problem. Our board and the police department will be asked to investigate these. and we're going to have drivers from companies based in other towns operating under state licenses with limited local visibility into who's delivering, when and whom.

We don't believe that's a sustainable model for protecting our youth. fortunately there is something that the select board can do and it's really up to the select board and it's not up to the board of health because we do not have the authority to do this and that is to ask for a waiver from the cannabis control commission If we ask for a waiver, we can have a two-year waiver. And upon initial application, it must be granted. Then I would ask that the select board actually calendar this so once we get a waiver, it doesn't fall by the wayside. So two years from now, it has to be renewed if we're going to do that. So that is essentially what I have for you. I think that this may be coming to you soon. I don't know but we just got wind of it because it just happened in the last month. But in the meantime, right now, deliveries can come to Needham. So I would hope that we would act on this relatively quickly.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We're actually going to be speaking about it later tonight.

Perfect. Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you. okay um just want to check that there are no comments online and no others in the room okay thank you uh so we're gonna move on to our first which is our 2026 Pride month proclamation. And for that, we will turn to the Vice Chair.

Thank you. I'll read the proclamation. Town of Needham 2026 Pride Month Proclamation. Whereas the town of Needham is a welcoming community, and whereas Needham values the diversity of its residents and people everywhere, and whereas Needham respects the contributions that each and every resident makes to our town, and whereas Needham appreciates the rich tapestry of its residents in ethnicity, culture, race, sexuality, and gender identities, and whereas Needham embraces our LGBTQIA plus community and whereas LGBTQIA plus youth are at especially high risk of experiencing discrimination Mistreatment and Violence and the Town is committed to ensuring that they are safe, valued and supported. Now, therefore, be it resolved that June 2026 be declared Pride Month

in the Town of Needham and that all residents be encouraged to recognize and acknowledge the contributions of the LGBTQIA plus members of our community as we continue to advance the principles of liberty, equality, inclusivity and justice for all.

Madam Chair, I would move that the Board vote to approve and sign the 2026 Pride Month Proclamation.

Second. Any discussion? all right all those in favor aye those opposed motion carries excellent thank you Our next item of business we have a number of grants of location so I assume that we have Joanne Callender coming over and I notice that all three of these are listed for the same time frame. So I'm wondering if we can do a little swap because I know that there's someone in the room who wants to speak to the last one and has a time. So if you'd like to come on up, you can have a seat. So just hang out there for just one sec. We're going to do the 6 o'clock public hearing grant of location for 18 Grant Street first. Hi, Joanne. How are you?

Oh, good. OK, we can hear you now. Excellent. So tell us about this grant of location, please.

My name is 18. 18 Grant Street, Eversource is seeking to grant a location to install approximately five feet of conduit from pole 21 over two to the private property, and that is to provide a service for 18 Grant Street.

Okay, great. Thank you. Madam Town Manager, is everything in order? It is. Okay. So this is a public hearing and we do have someone who wants to make a public comment. So now if you could just introduce your name and your address and then tell us what you want to say.

My name is Becky Gardner. I live at 22 Grant Street next door to this property. I have no problem with anything they want to do. But I am moving on. June 8th with two 26-foot tractor trailers coming to move me out. And I'm petrified that the Eversource people are going to show up that same day, which would be a problem. So I called Eversource and I was told that you guys actually controlled when they came or could say that they couldn't come until after a specific date. So that's why I'm here.

OK. I'm going to turn that over to you.

Actually, I believe I spoke with the customer and what I said was that we have to get a street opening permit from your Department of Public Works and they can determine when we can do our work. they can tell us that we need to start after June 10th. And we'll abide by whatever the DPW directs us to do.

Just sounds like we have a logistics issue. So if we could just note that on the application.

Yes, and I wonder if Miles can just take your contact information if you want to just chat with him so we can just follow up.

Thank you. All right, you're all set. I think it sounds like they're going to work it out. Go right out into the hall with Miles and he'll take care of all that. Okay, this is still a public hearing. Does anyone else have anything to say about this grant of location? Okay, and is there anyone online?

all right then excuse me i didn't hear kevin can we do it just somebody that they don't do it on that date a motion or no should we leave it to dvw

it sounds like the date was relative to the street opening permit which is you're not voting on that but I think we've noted the concern I just want to I'll talk with DPW to make sure her driveway is clear on that day not to hear not to get make sure it gets to DPW

Yes, absolutely. Miles will take care of that.

So I would welcome a motion. Madam Chair, I move that the select board approve and sign a petition from Eversource Energy to install approximately five feet of conduit in Grant Street.

Second.

Okay. Any more discussion? Okay. All those in favor? Aye. Those against? Okay. The motion passes. Excellent. So we'll go back. To the beginning then, Joanne. 106 Windsor Road.

Eversource to seek an agreement location to install approximately five feet of conduit. That will be from pole 45, excuse me, 418 over 10. And that is to provide underground service to 106 Windsor Road.

okay everything's in order it is okay any uh anybody in the room who wants to speak to this grant application anybody online? All right, then I'd welcome a motion unless I just had one question.

Is this in connection with the tank that we approved last time?

Not related to the tank, but it's the same new construction. So same site. Thank you. Yes.

I would move that the Select Board approve and sign a petition from Eversource Energy to install approximately five feet of conduit in Windsor Road.

Second. All right. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. And our last one, Joanne, of 20 resources. Go ahead. Yes, I'm sorry.

Go ahead. Eversource is seeking a grand location to install approximately 35 feet of conduit and that's into Whitman Road and that is to provide service to 120 Whitman Road. Okay. It's a new home at that location.

Thank you. Everything is in order.

Perfect.

This is another public hearing. So does anyone have anything to say about this one? And no one in line. Okay. Well, in that case, do we have a motion?

Madam Chair, I move that the Select Board approve and sign a petition from Eversource Energy to install approximately 35 feet of conduit in Whitman Road. Second.

All right. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The motion carries. Thank you. Thank you, Joanne. Have a good evening. Take care. All right. The easy stuff is done. Now, we're going to take a look at the sale of bonds anticipatory note with the Deputy Town Manager, Director of Finance and Cecilia Simchak, our Assistant Director of Finance. Welcome.

Good evening Madam Chair. We're coming before you the treasurer, the acting treasurer collector Diane Ryan had a very successful sale. the town is issuing a $10.9 million bond anticipation note, which will mature in November. The intention at that time is there'll be a partial pay down and we anticipate that we'll be converting that to a bond, which will require us to, which we will be borrowing additional funds for ongoing projects, including the public works and water and sewer projects. The sale, we received five bids as noted in the cover memo. The winning bidder offered a 3.5% interest rate with a premium $41,696.64, which means the net interest cost to the town

is a 2.5856%, which is significantly better than the bond anticipation note that you approved last month. If you have any questions for Ms. Simchick or I, we'll certainly answer them.

Okay. Do you have any questions?

No. Kevin? No questions. Thank you for doing all of this.

Josh? No, thank you.

Bill? No, thank you.

All right, well, that was a hell of a memo then. It's Dave. Of course, it's from Dave. Not our first memo of this type. Okay, so does somebody want to make a motion in that case?

That's a long motion.

That's a long motion. Perhaps you could move it as written.

I'll make a motion. Motion A, B, C, D, E, and F as written.

Second. Okay, any other discussion? Wow, that went really fast. Okay, all those in favor? Aye. Those opposed? Motion carries.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have some signature pages to pass around for the board to assign. And I'll note that our town clerk, Louise Miller, is here to say that you're doing this not under duress. And I have two documents for Mr. Keane to sign as the clerk of the board attesting to the vote that she just took.

Excellent. Okay, so. I'll just sit here in silence for a few minutes while we sign. And I find our next agenda item.

There we go. Exactly.

Thank you.

Madam Chair, would it be appropriate to move consent while we're signing or should we just sign?

Sure. I think that sounds like a good use of time.

All right. I move the appointment and calendar and consent agenda. We have a second?

Second.

All right, all those in favor? Aye. Those opposed? Okay, the motion carries.

I don't think we have time on this one.

Thank you.

all right so I am especially pleased to welcome up for our next agenda item Gabby Cleenan our sustainability manager and whatever members of the tree preservation and planning committee are in the room and would like to join at the table come on don't be shy okay you're welcome to join yeah please be great and you don't have to if you don't want to We are on time, right? Yeah. Yeah, OK. I think we're just shy of a quorum. So no. Yeah. okay so the the uh right because we need six six and we have five okay so the tree committee uh will not be calling an

all have a meeting to order even though that meeting was noticed that's because we don't have a quorum so that's fine we're still gonna have you all here and go through the presentation so let's just go through the committee members and have you introduce yourselves please just say your name and your role on the committee that's all yeah you just talk my name is Kurt Petrini and I was representing the developer thank you

Oscar Mertz, I was their liaison with the large house committee.

Gabby Queenan, I'm the sustainability manager, staff liaison for the committee.

Fred Motor, liaison from Climate Action Committee Josh Levy, representative of the Stormwater

Group, and Heidi Frail represented from the Select Board. Excellent. Thank you and welcome.

I'm going to take us through some slides briefly and then we'll have plenty of time for questions and discussion.

So just for everyone to understand what's going on, the tree committee has been working for year and a half almost and we have developed a bylaw for the town to regulate private trees and that's what the presentation is about this is the handover meeting the end of that work hand over to the select board for More evaluation.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So you heard a little bit from each of our committee members on the screen. You'll see the list of the full group and a note that the asterisks are a representation of folks who are first time committee members so we had great representation across a few a few different groups and I should also note that Ed Olson who recently left his position was a staff liaison with with me as well so I'll be representing the Staff liaison team solo tonight. So why are we here? In short, we're talking about a tree bylaw because of tree loss. so often we hear this question of how many trees has Needham lost is this you know really a significant issue so to get that question of what we've seen for a loss of tree cover.

The Charles River Watershed Association, that's our regional watershed association, put together a regional tree protection and planting plan in January 2026 and they did a GIS data analysis looking at tree cover loss across each of the communities within the watershed and they were focused on trees that were removed from 2008 to 2021. That's the GIS data that's available to us right now for land cover. And what they found was for Needham specifically, on average between 2008 and 2021, Needham lost an average of 14 football fields of tree cover each year, or in total 180 football fields of tree cover in total. Put another way, if you've been upstairs to Powers Hall recently, Needham has lost from 2008 to 2021 an average of 230 Powers Halls each year.

or 2,962 powers halls in total over that period of time. So I'm just going to show some examples really quickly of tree loss on particular residential lots. These are looking at Google Earth images from 2015 and 2025, just so you can get a sense of some of that change. So what are we losing when we talk about tree loss? Well, the biggest piece is we're losing the benefits of trees, and in particular, larger, more mature trees provide a larger scale of benefits. So this screen, we've highlighted a few examples of some of the benefits for trees, but I'll just touch on a couple very briefly. Stormwater management and erosion control. Root systems of trees help aerate soil, increase water infiltration. Canopy helps intercept rainfall, reducing runoff and erosion.

economic and health benefits, larger mature trees have been shown to increase property values, also offering proximity to Some of those larger canopies has been linked to lower stress levels, reduced noise, better mental health, carbon sequestration and air quality. Trees are massive carbon sinks, so they help us as we think about things like climate adaptation and resiliency. and then also Climate and Energy Control. Those larger mature trees are offering more evapotranspiration and they're helping with direct shading, so helping to reduce energy usage for AC in the summer, for example. and then finally biodiversity support. Those larger systems have that great benefit of offering ecosystems for insects, birds, all kinds of wildlife. So a lot of different benefits that when we lose those larger trees, we lose those larger benefits.

so of course you're all very familiar with the committee charge that was set by the select board back in 2004 when the committee was established we're focusing here tonight on charge item number six which is focused on the development of a bylaw to support of Tree Preservation. as was just mentioned. The Tree Committee first met back in March 2025 and has met 23 times since that first meeting. There's been three different public forums as part of this bylaw development process. June 2025, November 2025, and March 2026. And we're here today in May handing over this bylaw to the select board. and I should also note that this bylaw was drafted with the original intent that this would be brought to October special town meeting. So what is the goal of the tree preservation bylaw?

overwhelmingly I would say that tree preservation has come up in different contexts but it's come up in particular on this subject of clear-cutting and this focus has been really on Clearcutting due to new construction. So there hasn't been a focus as much on public shade trees. Those are regulated separately by Massachusetts state law, but more residents have expressed concerns regarding trees on private property. So the desire of the tree committee was to try to craft a bylaw that would address the more extreme situations of clear cutting that have become more evident related to new construction. So what's highlighted on the screen is really what the primary goals are for this bylaw to help preserve private tree canopy in Needham, reflect the community priorities that have been reiterated on this topic of tree canopy loss.

Craft something that's clear, easy for developers, builders and residents to understand and take a more thoughtful approach to clear cutting for new construction. So when would the tree bylaw apply? So as drafted, the tree bylaw is going to be triggered by particular permits. So again, really focused on construction. So triggers include opening a demolition permit, opening a new construction permit or opening an addition alteration permit or other permit. Think, for example, a street permit that would result in an increase in the building footprint of 25% or more. Thank you. So if one of those triggers is met, a tree protection and mitigation plan would need to be submitted by a certified arborist to the tree warden or their designated agent. And the criteria of that plan is identified in the bylaw regulations.

and I should also note that there is included in the draft a 12 month look back period from the date of permit request. So where would the tree bylaw apply? So the goal here is to keep the buildable area of the lot the same. What we're talking about for applicability of the tree by-law is the tree yard, which is shown on this screen. Nice purple color and that's our zoning setbacks. So what's changing here is not the buildable area. What changes is the parcel owner's ability to clear cut without any consequences. So trees within the buildable area of the lot would not be protected under the draft bylaw as written. Most of this area is likely not as heavily treed anyways, particularly on smaller lots. So the tree yard where this bylaw would apply is just within those existing zoning setback areas.

So what is the tree bylaw focused on? So as discussed, the bylaw is focused on clear cutting. versus removal of individual trees. So this would only apply to more mature trees. The threshold that's been set is

oh yeah sick oh yeah sorry thank you i'm gonna pause you for a second uh we'll welcome erica bond the tree committee co-chair and we will we will um That's okay. We will just call to order the meeting of the Tree Preservation and Planning Committee because we have achieved a quorum. So that is really all that's necessary to do, but we need to do it. So here we go, and then we'll just go ahead and continue.

Okay, sorry.

Not a good catch. All right, so the tree viola is really only focused on applicability for more mature trees. So the threshold that's set within the draft is 6 inches DBH diameter at breast height for those who might not be familiar with the term basically for four and a half feet up from the ground and then measure circumference calculate for diameter so do circumference divided by pi that's how you get your diameter And again, as we just talked about in the previous slide, we're only interested in trees that are within the tree yard. Again, those existing zoning setbacks. What is the tree bylaw not focused on? So as we said, the bylaws only focused on six inches DBH. So smaller trees aren't being pulled in. And this... Bylaw is really trying to get those more egregious situations of clear cutting on lots.

So this isn't going to prevent property owners from removal of individual trees, for example, trees that are considered diseased or dangerous. We're going to talk about that a little bit more on the next slide. and again there's going to be some options for how trees can be removed in situations like this. and so on. So we'll go through some examples so you can see what that would look like. So places this tree by law does not apply. Trees that are deemed hazardous. Trees that have been deemed diseased, infested. Trees under the jurisdiction of our conservation commission should be noted that those trees have their own rules and regulations that apply to those. Public shade trees, those are already protected under Massachusetts state law chapter 87. And then trees that are deemed needed for removal due to emergency projects.

I should also note one item that's not on the slides but you may have seen included in your draft bylaw and regulations and that is with regard to waivers the tree committee spent a good bit of time talking about smaller lots and what to do in situations where there are particularly small lots. So one item that is included in your draft is the ability to apply for a waiver for lots with less than 80 feet of frontage. So Treewarden might be able to waive applicability of that bylaw if requested, and that's only for within the front yard. So not counting those side yards, just that space in between. and that's only if the applicant demonstrates that it's necessary to adequately provide for installation of utilities, drainage or some other type of subsurface infrastructure. So just wanted to indicate that that's another instance where this would not apply if a waiver was requested. So how would this bylaw incentive process work?

So the committee is proposing that if the bylaw were triggered by one of those construction permits for protected trees, Again, just within the tree yard, just the zoning setbacks. An applicant would need to either preserve and protect existing trees and or remove and replace with new trees and or remove and compensate with a contribution to the town's tree replacement revolving fund. So you could choose to do any of these three options. Again, you could choose to do just one, some combination of those. New trees that were planted for replacement would need to have a minimum caliber of 1.5 inches, and the newly planted trees would need to survive for at least 24 months. All right, so we're going to hone in a little bit more on the replacement option.

So we talked about you could preserve or protect, remove and replace, or you could remove and choose the contribution option. So focusing on replacement. So we're going to introduce this element of incentivizing the protection and preservation of our larger trees, our overstory trees. So those are trees that when they reach a mature height, they're usually above 40 feet or more. So for those trees, and I should preface this by saying no other Massachusetts community has taken this approach with their tree bylaws. take note of that. The Treat Committee is proposing that When you remove one DBH, so again, four and a half feet up, one inch of diameter, breast height of protected tree, you would need to replace with one DBH of new tree unless

If you are replacing with an inch of new overstory tree, that counts towards three inches of replacement required. and again, this idea is to try to incentivize the planting of more of these overstory trees that we know have such significant benefits. Similarly, if you are able to preserve anywhere on the property so we're not just talking about the zoning setbacks anywhere in the property one inch of overstory that counts towards two inches of replacement that would be required and again the goal is to try to preserve some of these larger mature trees that have this more significant canopy that we know provides significant benefits and I should note we ran multiple scenarios many different lots and These were the ratios that seemed to work out the most reasonably.

Okay, so focusing on the next option, mitigation. So let's say you're not interested in preserving or protecting or not interested in replacing your really want to hone in on that mitigation option where you can pay into the tree fund. So in drafting this tree bylaw, the tree committee focused on evaluating County, existing tree bylaws and ordinances and a few other communities those are listed on the screen along with their year of the tree bylaw ordinance County, Tree By-law Ordinance First Adoption. So in evaluating how other communities have approached this issue of mitigation fees, ultimately the Tree Committee has decided to propose $300 per DBH inch of protected tree remove and you can see how this compares to some other communities that have been listed on that screen. And again, as noted before, no other community has taken this approach of putting together a

Preservation Credit or your placement credit for Overstory. So that is included as well. And the idea is to try to help lower the amount of fees and really encourage the preservation and planting of overstory trees which as mentioned earlier provide those more significant benefits. Any mitigation fees that were provided would be paid into the Tree Replacement Revolving Fund used for the purchase, maintenance, distribution and promotion of public shade trees in Needham, which is a similar model used by other communities. implementation. I'm just going to touch on this briefly. So the tree committee has had several conversations about what potential implementation requirements might need to look like for a draft tree bylaw, including conversations with the town manager's office.

So based on potential applicable permit numbers, feedback from peer communities who are already in the process of doing implementation, we would assume a part-time non-benefit eligible position capped at $19.5 hours per week would be required to implement the draft bylaw. Conversations regarding enforcement do need to be more fleshed out, in particular if the bylaw is reliant on enforcement fines. as it is anticipated if this is included as a general bylaw. And then as noted previously, the bylaw was really drafted to try to focus on these more egregious situations of clear cutting and would assume that staff would be spending more of those time on those instances. So I'll just end with a couple photos. So this photo was shared with us by another tree committee member, Andrew. So the left photo is from Street View of Google Maps in 2023.

And the right was taken by Andrew this past week on his way to the train. So as you can see, the photo on the left is showing a number of large overstory trees present for the most part within the tree yard. So within those zoning setbacks. On the right, the photo is showing the lot completely clear cut. So these photos illustrate what the draft tree bylaw is really trying to address, which is preventing a developer from being able to clear cut without any consequences. and I'll just end with this photo, which was also flagged by another tree committee member, Nick. And this was taken this past week as well. This photo is really illustrating what the tree bylaw is aspiring to do, which is to encourage the preservation of existing trees to the extent possible on a lot where construction is taking place. In this case, Those larger overstory trees are in the corner of the lot within the tree yard. So with that, happy to pause and take any questions.

I just want to thank the committee for this amazing work. Your statistics at the beginning of the tree loss are truly astounding and this is very thoughtful. I'm interested in From any of you, what were the most difficult issues that you had to grapple with here? And why did you resolve them the way that you did?

Some people Some of the input that we got from people was that we weren't going far enough. And some of the input that we got from people was that we were going too far. So trying to find that happy middle where we wanted to make sure that we could make an impact but yet we didn't want to overburden the public and come to a point where it would be something that town meeting might not want to adopt? So that was one of the issues. Anybody has anything else?

I would say that we also had feedback that Without the credits, many tree preservation bylaws penalize homeowners who have kept a large number of trees on their lot with the possibility that it reduces the price that a developer would pay them for their property. and so we did wrestle with that for quite a while and we feel excited about the possibility that this feature will introduce some fairness that way.

I think another one of the challenging balancing acts was when we were thinking about how we were going to apply this It was clear from a lot of conversations with many of us and surveys that were done by some of the folks on the committee that Needham has quite a range of properties some with very few trees, some with very many trees. So I think the challenge with us to find a way to do the incentive, and I think the incentive, which was a brilliant idea from one of the committee members we all thought was worth following, was that we wanted to find a balance for how you could save a tree if you had one tree. Maybe you save that tree and you get some real credit for it. And also, Conversely, if you had a lot of trees, you could find your way through taking those down and also saving some that would give you some credit against the mitigation fees.

The thing that was ultimately really interesting also was The idea behind the incentive for the overstories, if you replace, was to say, we think that Instead of having people go and throw a whole lot of small trees in, they would get credit for putting fewer trees in because we know it just at the end of the day, you can only put so many trees back on the property. they're all going to grow and they might not even survive or it might be just not a great growth future. So the idea of incentivizing the overstory trees was that you would actually have to plant fewer trees and it would be a greater benefit. So I think there was just Lots of interesting conversation about how do you deal with a variety of lots and then how do you try and figure out the balance for the solutions with incentivizing the overstories.

And I'll just add one other thing, which is that, as Gabby said, we really wanted to address the most egregious situations. We know that all over Needham, people have been having problem with stormwater coming after construction beside their property. the lot is clear cut and it can't absorb what it used to be able to absorb and maybe there's bigger house that's covered more so we wanted to we wanted to start somewhere and make an impact? And this is where we heard that there were most of the problems. There are other issues that maybe are addressed in the future, but this was trying to handle the 80-20 rule. Any other questions?

I just wondered, I'm looking at the potential staffing, how you came up with that. And I didn't know if there was anyone, there's probably no one in the town who could do this right now within the public works or whatever. especially since we just lost our tree warden so I don't know how that came about.

I can take that one which is whenever we're proposing policies we want to make sure that we're presenting to you a and what it would entail to actually implement it. So the team sat and talked through in communication with other communities how many hours we thought might be needed, but also what the qualifications of the person would be. So we would want a certified arborist. you know fast forward if there's a bylaw and this position is funded we would post the position like we do all of our positions and would just search for candidates with the appropriate qualifications. But the dollar amount and the wage rate was what our current pay rate is for commensurate responsibilities.

But you consulted with other towns?

Yes, we did.

We consulted with other towns, Bill, and we also reached out to every department that we could conceivably see an impact happening to. Gabby circulated a memo to every department and asked for their feedback.

Thank you.

Thank you for doing this.

This is a lot of work, and this is tough nut to crack. a license or basically a permit is being issued by the building department and engineering, right? And there'll be an initial plot plan. Did you talk to them? What does this look like to them when it comes down to them?

So I should clarify this isn't a new permit as it's drafted currently. So when a permit is requested by, say, the building department or engineering department, and so on. An individual would be checking if they have protected trees within the tree yard and if they have included a tree mitigation plan as required. then that information gets flagged for Parks and Forestry Division and then they're giving that to the tree warden or their designated agent who's doing the review once they've done a review you know conferred with the applicant if there's any questions they're then giving a written confirmation to the permitting authority building department or engineering division saying that you know all the requirements have been met and the they're all set to be able to move forward.

because when we talked with Stormwater, Josh, it was like there's now an initial plot plan that would be much larger and much more information. I wonder if that would be plotted on this now, a tree yard.

Yes, so there is within the tree plan, the regulations has a whole list of what's required to be included within the plan. So like indicating setbacks, existing trees, public shade trees, trees within the tree yard, and then Critical Root Zone, Tree Save Area, all of that would have to be indicated, DBH, Existing Species. so all of that will be captured in the plan and that's again being submitted by a certified arborist so the tree warden or their designated agent is really using that to make their determination of if they foresee any issues like is the is the foundation planned a little too close to an existing tree that they're saying they're going to preserve, things like that.

Okay, good, excellent point. And then also I'm wondering though with... now we've increased the amount of infiltration required in the stormwater bylaw. And I know the tree yard isn't that big and will be I mean, so this is going to be a tough equation for the builders to try to figure out how to fit the SCMs, the infiltration stuff, with the trees, with everything else they have to do. So Kurt, my question to you. How would this work? Exactly how contorted are you going to be when you do the engineering?

This was an issue that I had flagged. And I think we had left it, correct me if I'm wrong, but it was sort of going to be left up to the discretion of the tree warden.

Also, zoning bylaws will always trump the tree bylaw. So if something is allowed in an area currently under zoning law, it will still be allowed.

No, I understand that. There's going to be a point where you have to infiltrate X number, the equation of how much you have to infiltrate the stormwater. Yes. So how does that pinch your incentives to save a train

I mean it's case by case that was I think we had sort of left it up to the tree one because you know I think we had kind of figured that there was going to be enough room in the yards for the underground retention centers or and you can work around them but at the end of the day if a tree does have to come down because of that then you would look for relief from the tree warden okay all right and one of the

one of the areas and say discretion. But one of the limited exceptions we allowed is if there is less than 80 feet of frontage on a lot, the front portion between the side yard setbacks can be not counted, essentially.

like the tree yard would not include that portion okay yeah okay we've tried to be trying to be realistic especially on small lots

And when you talk overstory, are we talking types of trees?

It's a species. It's basically an overstory species that we're talking about.

All right, so I'm not talking small ornamentals. No, sir.

Something that at full maturity is usually over 40 feet tall. But it could be... Multiple species. Could be a native tree, could be a non-native tree.

Basswood or a linden. Those are the same thing. OK.

Thank you. Thank you. Sure. Any other questions?

Do we currently have a tree replacement revolving fund? Yes. Does anybody know what's in it?

I do not know the balance, obviously.

My recollection before Ed left was that he said that it was fully drained down. So nothing at the moment.

I think there were like 5,000, like a small amount in there before, yeah.

yeah planting a tree is a pretty expensive undertaking so um just something to keep in mind right yeah um well thank you uh so i just want to say from my heart to yours this was such a great experience this committee worked really really hard and really just brought amazing fresh perspectives and it was it was really a pleasure to attend 23 meetings over the course 18 months. So thank you. Thank you. Before you go, I would welcome a motion to dissolve the meeting of the Treaty Preservation and Planning Committee. So moved. Second? Excellent. All those in favor? Aye. Those opposed? Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you.

Great job.

All right. So we're going to continue our discussion on Envision Needham Center now with Katie King, our town manager, and Karis Lustig, our director of public works. welcome back just get to the right place here all right so we are picking up where we left off last week in the interim Karras wrote a memo that, was it Katie who wrote the memo? Oh, sorry. Katie wrote us this wonderful memo regarding the the merits of the Envision plan, namely that it sort of condenses a number of benefits to a number of select board goals all at once.

sort of in one geographic location as opposed to priorities that exist outside of the center in many different places but maybe don't have such a breadth of benefit. So Kathy, I know that in our last conversation, having that memo kind of laid out was really important to you. Do you have anything you want to?

Well, I just wanted to thank you for putting this together because this really did answer my question. I thought I thought this was excellent the way I asked for it was inarticulate so you read my mind which is great and this really does help me understand and put it all together and I guess my my initial reaction to it is there really is a lot even though it is and the four lane plan is not as dramatic a change as the two lane plans. There still is a lot that you get out of it. And just to be clear, the four lane plan is the only one of the three that I would personally consider but there there's a lot more here than what I realized you know once you put it all together and that it's just very very helpful to me so thank you

Anyone else?

I had a quick question about replacing the 54 parking meters because isn't there a plan to get new meters anyway but would they be different or is that?

the project under way is to add an option to be able to pay by app but that was to be in addition to meters

And I'll just speak to, as part of the design process, we would select the method of collection that we would have. And if we continue to go with meters, we would have to replace what we have existing.

So if we didn't do anything, they would go forward with the app to change it?

We will move forward with the app regardless of what decision we make about coin fed meters.

That's just a sticker that we put on the meter. So that could happen at any time. That's how you do it. You just put a sticker.

OK, Josh? I want to talk more about the drainage. I feel like that's the biggest decision. because if you do the direct drainage that means you're ripping up the road and you put it back with all these other add-ons if you don't do the drainage right now then you probably wouldn't want it I mean you want to do the safety measures but you might in anticipation that you may have to do drainage in the future, I don't think you'd want to do all of the surface level things like pavers on the sidewalks, things like that.

So I think one of the things we're struggling with is sort of articulating the interconnectivity between all the different elements. And so I think when we talk about safety measures, there's certain measures you can't do without ripping up the road. we talked about ADA accessibility as one of those particular items because it's a pitch issue you can't adjust the pitch of the sidewalk without adjusting the elevation of the road because then you'd have like nine inch curbs and that would be problematic. So there is an interrelationship regardless and drainage is sort of part of that very system. The road itself is part of the drainage system. so you're correct in that you wouldn't want to do a ton of surface repairs and then change the drainage structures so the drainage would you sort of want to lead the project what I will say is at least on the roadway itself in several of the areas we are going to have to entertain some sort of resurfacing program because it is coming to the end of its useful life.

Yeah, so on the subservice issues, I looked up the stormwater master plan that the beta did for us. So this area of Great Plains is in Subwatershed 12, and all of the issues that are mentioned in the plan in that watershed are further north on Highland Ave, like near Oakland, Kingsbury. There were no mentions of specific problems in this corridor. I guess my... am I misremembering that?

So, I think... and I wish Tom was here to help articulate the difference, but the catchment area is definitely, the catchment area that goes down Chestnut Street is directly attributable to this particular corridor.

And those are in Watershed 13.

So they're connected from a systems perspective. They're just not identified as how the town broke up. The water system, the catchments are better indicators of how the water flows through the town than the watershed breakdown.

That's fair. So the specific catchment issues at Maple Street and Chestnut Street, those have their own proposed mitigation plans. as well as many other areas in town. I still feel that we should follow the plan that we have, that we have specific proposed mitigation measures at high need areas like Chestnut and Maple, and that we should do those first. Great Plain Ave. It may fit in that plan, but it's not in our master plan. I think we need to really address the highest priority issues first.

Keane, any thoughts?

Only a few. Thank you for the memo. It was helpful. you chunked it differently than we did on the committee. So I was like, you did it in four sections, A, B, C, D. I did it by rhodes. But I would, the snapshot is, I think on Great Plain Ave, the west end and the east end, basically all plans are the same. And there's real value for safety. And I think ultimately what we're doing is you don't get safety unless you design for it. and we have to have safety and I'm thinking what like we're saying at TMAC you know there are people who risk their lives crossing Great Plain Ave over by Michaelson's. and I think we owe it to Needham Residence to actually make a move on that and have this.

I'm fine I think it makes sense to go ahead and tell DPW go ahead with the four-lane plan because I know you need a project to work because this is so interconnected to every other project including the parking lot on Chestnut Street. And so You also, unbeknownst to us, the Quiet Zone passed town meeting. And I think you have to engineer that in as well. So let's let DPW go forward and do this Envision project with the four as a four lane engineer it with your other project as you go along and that's what you need the quiet zone crossing and so I think we have a project but I wish we were doing more personally but I get that this is there's a lot of um safety issues that are worth doing in this and that's good to do

I just wanted to also clarify in the memo but on the stormwater piece we talked about it a little bit at your last meeting but you know our prioritization for stormwater is some of those are standalone projects and a lot of those are when we are already touching things we are going to be thinking about stormwater mitigations as a part of them So I don't want those two buckets of priorities to kind of get lost or be in conflict with one another. And if this so, you know, for this project, it is a component of a larger roadway project and again with the chapter 90 eligibility just so everyone's clear if there wasn't a roadway project it does not free up funds to do a standalone stormwater project so it's you know the the priority from the board is clear around stormwater but how we're approaching it kind of depends on and so forth.

So we're going to be able to get funding available and when we're being opportunistic to plug it into a project that we're doing for a multitude of other

Madam Chair, I just on that point, I think one of the things that was helpful for me in this memo was it helped me to see the efficiencies of doing it all together. So, you know, we had talked about what you just said that the only way to get chapter money chapter 90 money to pay for drainage is if it's included in a road project so you have that but you also have under, it's on page 152 of the packet, the largest single line item here is the other costs incurred across all elements, which is essentially your overhead, right? And so that you're gonna you're gonna have a whole lot of that even if you do much less that's part of the reason why I think the cost didn't go down that much when you go from the two lane to the four lane so it gets even worse I'm understanding from this memo it gets even worse if you do less. even less efficient.

So trying to bring all these things together has a great amount of efficiency that I can see more clearly with this memo.

Yeah, I guess that's where I struggle. The value of this whole project lies in the two and a half lane plan for me, because you get all those other benefits. And it seems to me that doing the four lane plan is stripping out the benefits to parking and safety and traffic management and infrastructure, outdoor dining and retail space, walkability, bringing foot traffic in, placemaking. it's hard for me to justify now without those benefits. I mean, it's all worthy work, but it's expensive. So if we I guess I would want to make sure that if we're doing a four lane plan that we're making sure that the needed pedestrian safety elements are included.

But in doing so, we have to understand that at some point, potentially, that means that we'll be, if we ever decide to change the center, we have to acknowledge that some of that work will go away. We'll have to dig it up again. And I think there's already work that people are worried that we're going to have to redo. And so I just

I feel like it's important to to say that that is a risk which is why I think we've spoken about this I think if I'm mischaracterizing you please let me know I feel like we're on the same page perhaps for slightly different reasons like for me I feel like it would be better to go minimal do like the safety upgrades that I think Justin mentioned two weeks ago at the intersections particularly at Pickering and at Glen Doon, Maple. Yeah, thank you. But because there's a risk that it may have to be ripped up again in the future, not to do too much right now.

what i don't i'm sorry i don't know if there's a middle ground though i mean if we're going to do a thing we have to do the thing and part of that thing in this case is like making the area not a football field across. So does that mean putting an island in the middle? Whatever it means, and especially on the other end of the street where we're talking about the quiet zone as well. And we have stuff we would have to do there for that. I mean, I just don't think that we're it's not an insignificant amount of work. Plus, whatever you touch, then you have to do the ADA stuff. So even if we want to just do this, it's not itself on an island.

so just to speak to those temporary we've had this conversation obviously quite a bit in office to figure out if this project doesn't move forward what can we do and at what cost and i think The town manager included a portion of that in her memo about what we roughly think each of those intersections would cost to make safety improvements. The things we'd be looking at would be bump outs and potentially a refuge island at both of those locations. What I will say, and this is just how integral the whole roadway system is together, to make those two modifications. You also have to make drainage modifications because the flow is going to be different if you have a bump out in those locations. And we'd also have to look at likely parking space removals in order to accommodate bump outs permanently. Because if you look at how a few of those parking spaces are configured, they actually don't meet our own requirements as far as the proximity of that parking spot to the intersection and so to engineer the bump out as it currently stands you may have to lose a parking space as well.

what about flashing lights, you know, technical improvements?

RFPs we also included as part of that sort of ad hoc item. I think one of the challenges adding them right now is you have such a long distance you'd likely want a refuge island with the RFB installed in the refuge island in order to properly illuminate the you know worn drivers because you're looking at quite a far distance between where the two RFBs would be as far as providing the visual cue to a driver.

It's not about the timing. You can't have it flash for a long time while people are crossing.

It's not so much that. It's about getting people's attention and having two lights that are further apart doesn't necessarily hit the same visual field as if you had it tighter. so we can also talk about adding those in and that was included as part of the budget that we we had provided the town manager so one of the other concerns that I have is that

you know potentially now we just put in some of the pedestrian safety stuff but eventually these pipes I mean they don't last forever so eventually we're gonna have to go back in and I guess to me then we won't be able to pay for it with chapter 90 money and we'd be ripping up part of the street and have to redo the street and it just seems it just seems like you know you want to do a thing once

I would say volumetrically is actually probably not a public hearing.

We're not going to be taking public comment.

Probably more DPW is concerned than the age of the pipe per se, because we're looking at 12 inch diameter pipe, which is what you would have in a traditional suburban street. not necessarily what you would have in an urban corridor. And that's all we have. We have no infiltration in the area as well. So I think the size of the pipe, I think we talked about this internally quite a bit. We are seeing more frequent, significant rainfall in a short duration. And so I think the concern is more likely that we will have another event in which we exceed our capacity for a period of time in order to process it through our drainage system will likely come before we have the failure of the pipe itself.

OK, fair. All right, so one last thing. We have concept designs, but we don't have engineering designs. And so that would be our next step once we give you some direction here. Can you just talk briefly about what the timeline on that might look like? I assume that we're going with a four-lane plan. whether that's to do nothing or to do some of these improvements it's not yet Clear. So we're not doing the major redo. So can you talk about what does that process look like so we can understand and the public can understand how we chunk that out?

So we've talked about this internally as well. And I think the next step would be getting funding for design. So we had discussed in our Envision Committee meeting, and I know at the last meeting about going through the town meeting process in order to initiate that. So the next opportunity would be either October or May in order to start the design process. So we'd need to secure funding first. We have sufficient funds in Chapter 90 to supplement, but whatever vote ends up going to town meeting would need to occur before that. Once that happens, we would we would scope a service and figure out, I guess, what variables we have at this particular point. Like you said, we have a concept plan. I think when we were talking about the quiet zone, we talked about the quiet zone being at a 30% and people being apprehensive about taking action at 30%. And obviously we're at 0% with this project. So we're really at the very beginning stages. And in our committee meetings, we would often have conversations that were tricky because

almost everyone wanted to see all three plans fully engineered to be able to fully compare them. And we can't. So there was a lot of conversation of like, could you pull this curve back? Could you tweak this parking spot? That's what happens in the design phase. and typically speaking you get quite a ways through the superficial design so looking at the roadway layout before you then end up designing your drainage system because the drainage system how it ends up interacting with the above ground is very critical on where you have your bump outs and where you have your curb line and the pitch of the road. so you know we would anticipate I would assume an 18 month period as far as design goes at that point and then we would be looking at construction funds both ensuring that we have either enough secured through Chapter 90, whatever supplemental town funds we would be looking for, and then whatever grant funds we feel like this project would qualify for at that time.

um bill you got any thoughts you want to share i mean this is just a great report thank you very much it shows you know the benefits that we do them all together and i know it's not the order of the stormwater but it seems like if you're doing this that you should do like i think you mentioned that we should do the stormwater repair at the same time so Initially, I was thinking, can we take a piecemeal out and do some or not? But I think it's best to do everything together with this four lane plan adoption.

okay um well does anyone want to make a motion regard to an outcome here uh madam chair i move that the um select board adopt the four lane plan as designed by the Envision Committee? Is that a proper motion?

Yeah. Could I ask to clarify? You mean including subsurface work as well?

Yes, the whole, as the Envision Committee, or the Envision...

It's not even a committee, just the Envision.

Anyway, Four Lane Envision. Four Lane Concept.

Four Lane Concept.

Concept.

Second.

Any other discussion? Yeah, so I agree with the four-lane concept. I'm not in favor of ripping up the road and doing the subsurface work at this time.

Can I? Yes. if we were to implement that concept, we would have to redo the drainage because you're modifying components of the road. I mean, you wouldn't have to necessarily modify

Then let me, maybe I'm being unclear. I like having the configuration of four lanes. whether that is the status quo or having some, the proposal envisions altering, making alterations while maintaining four lanes. I don't necessarily see the need to move forward with all of those alterations at this time. So I would prefer a more minimal plan, which may be different from this proposal then.

okay i guess it's unclear to me how we're how we're going to because this is just a concept plan so there's the there's the don't do anything or there's a concept plan that needs further refinement and i think I understand your hesitation, but I feel like we need to make a binary choice between those two because we need to give direction. So it sounds to me like developing Engineering Plans is going to be a process that is iterative, correct? will there be checkpoints during which we can decide which elements we're putting in here?

I just want to clarify, you know, big picture next step, you know, the decision before the board is do you want us to move on to design? for the holistic estimated $13.5 million project. I think I understand that to be the question that we're seeking guidance from. right so I would view that as binary and then I think if the answer is yes move forward then we can talk about what does design process look like when do we check in with the board when don't we but you know I think it would be yes or no because if the answer is you know no then we're not going to seek funds for design we won't move forward with a scope of services to design you know the project just falls off the list right and Kathy's motion captured all that

Levy, Levy, Reid Dowd, Needham, Councilor the select board authorized moving forward with design of the four lane reconstruction program estimated at roughly 13 million dollars.

Second.

Okay, any more discussion? Okay. in that case we'll take a vote all right all those in favor of Kathy's motion I'm going to reluctantly vote for this motion voted for an existing following plan. Excuse me. Excuse me. This is not a public hearing.

It should be.

Thank you, Mr. Wolfson. That's enough. All right. For the board, all those in favor of Kathy's motion?

Aye.

Aye. Aye. And those opposed? Nay. Okay. The motion passes, and we will move forward. thank you all right okay the next item on our agenda is the police department annual report gentlemen welcome thank you for joining thank you

What's that?

All right, so Let me just get to the right place here. all right so this is our annual uh report from the department this is for the year 2025 correct and we're looking forward to hearing what you have to say

Yes, I prepared a brief summary and obviously at the end we'll take any questions that you may have. The Needham Police Department has continued to adapt to the changing environment in order to continue serving the needs of all our community members. Currently, Needham Police Department has 48 sworn officers with two recruits attending the academy in June. and we have just begun the hiring process to fill the final three openings which will bring us to full complement 53. One of the major undertakings for the past two years has been participation and completion of the Massachusetts Police Accreditation Standards. As of February 2025, the Needham Police Department is a fully accredited police department. This is an ongoing process as we are required to become re-accredited every three years. Achieving accreditation is vital to every department, especially in today's policing environment.

as it helps ensure accountability and transparency and that we can enhance confidence and trust in law enforcement among the communities we serve. embarking on this process it allowed us to look at our department's operation providing police services we're able to look at our organizational structure staffing needs while looking at our operations functions and ensuring that we are following the best practices in public safety. In 2025, the town had 592 Group A offenses, which is down from 645 in 2024. While down in Group A offenses, overall there was an increase in sex-related crimes, aggravated and simple assault, and intimidation crimes. Needham had 356 Group B offenses. in 2025, which include traffic and bylaw violations.

There were 104 total assault offenses committed in 76 cases in 2025. This is nine more offenses than in 2024. The Needham Police Department continues to track data relating to five different areas to capture more detailed data based on current issues and citizen concerns. These areas are mental health, drug overdose, handcuffing, domestic violence, and use of force. In 2025, there were 208 calls that were deemed mental health related, and our clinician had 417 co-response interactions. There was a total of eight total overdoses. Of the eight overdoses, three of them had Narcan administered by police. Six overdoses did not require the use of Narcan. There was one suspected overdose death this year. Thank you.

Handcuffing is inevitable and necessary part of policing. In 2025, there were 117 times that handcuffing was used. This number is 27 more than last year, which had 90 instances. 91 out of the 117 78% of those instances in 2025 were for arrests. The handcuffing reasons, the rest was 91. Warrant of apprehension, 9. Mental health issue, 9. Officer safety, 3. Protective custody, 2. and there were other three, totaling 117. Domestic violence in 2025, there were 95 domestic disturbance, domestic violence related calls in Needham. This is eight more than in 2024.

48 out of 95, 50% of these calls were verbal only in nature and did not escalate into any form of physical violence. 24 calls had the offense of assault and battery attached to them. 13, which is about 13% calls related to a 2 and I violation, which is a restraining order violation. Nine of the domestic related calls reported threats or intimidation and one of those incidents was a strangulation. Use of force incidents that need a police are involved as a result of an individual's level of unlawful compliance, resistance, and not an officer looking to harm the public.

We are obligated morally by law and policy to use only a level of force that is reasonable and necessary to effect an arrest to ensure public safety or protect ourselves or others from harm. In 2025, there are eight times in which force was used during a call for service. In some calls, multiple types of force used by multiple officers were necessary to resolve the situation and maintain safety for all present. In two calls, there were multiple subjects involved. As the types of force that we had, now we only had eight, but there were multiple officers. Hands On Control, which would be officers putting their hands on people that were resisting. Water Control, and Guide. There were 17 of those. A Taser Pointed was two. A Taser Unholstered was four. Firearm Unholstered, zero.

And a Less Lethal, one. race and gender interactions, the Massachusetts racial profiling reporting includes the following options when identifying a person by race, Asian or Pacific Islander, black, Hispanic, American Indian, Alaska Native, Middle Eastern, East Indian, South Asian, and White. For clarity, some of those categories that have been shortened in the tables below but are representative of all individuals in that category so when we talk about motor vehicles by race we had approximately I think it was 4,800 motor vehicle stops and as in the The charts indicates the breakdown of those. We had 48, 4,000

1896 motor vehicle stops with percentages related to race and residents remain consistent with previous years as we go back and look at our numbers for the previous four to five years we're seeing that Our numbers are consistent with what they are the past four or five years. So there might be a couple more this year, a couple less next year. But what we're seeing generally is the tendency to be equal and on a steady line is what they've been generally since I've taken over. there were a total of 91 arrests in Needham in 2025 which is up from 2024 we had 56

in 2023 he had 64. um i do have a long breakdown if you want to know what the crimes are if you're comfortable with them or

This is in the packet. It's all in the packet. I think if anyone has questions, because I think we've all read it, we can ask.

Juveniles, mental health related incidents. We had 68 mental health incidents involving juveniles. That's four less than in 2024. There was one arrest of a juvenile in 2025. A 17 year old was charged with larceny over $1,200. receiving stolen property and operating a motor vehicle with suspended license. There were three juveniles that had to appear for a hearing at juvenile court. and there were 16 juveniles that we worked with prior to going to court that voluntarily entered our diversion program. It's something, depending on the crime, that we do offer the juveniles so that they're not put in the system We work with the courts and the family to make sure that we're getting them to the right place and if they need services, we do that. So we do a lot to make sure that we're not bringing juveniles to court at all.

The Needham Police Department, we had a total of 51,858 calls for service. This is about 1,800 less than 2,024, in which there were 53,696 calls. Despite the lower overall number of calls, we continue to see an increase in incident reports, arrests and motor vehicle crashes. Additionally, despite having less calls, we had approximately 200 more priority one calls in 2024 and over 100 more priority two calls than in 2024. So you can see if we're having more of the more serious priority. Officers are probably spending more time doing paperwork, investigations, and completing reports. So priority one level, we had 4,255 calls. Two, we had 2,970 calls.

And priority three was 44,000. 633. Together, Officer Dineno and Clinician Turnbull have provided resources and assistance to numerous individuals and families. Some of the calls, they were our community outreach team. and some of the calls for service that they handle include mental health concerns, substance abuse, domestic violence, homelessness, hoarding, and cognitive health concerns. Having a full-time officer and a full-time clinician have less than the number of repeat calls to select addresses. In addition to providing resources to individuals and families, the community outreach team participated in numerous community events including the annual sensory friendly open house national night out and our total community outreach team had a total of 417 interactions.

Accidents this year, there were 483 motor vehicle accidents reported in 2025. It's an increase of one from last year. And that's really kind of a brief overview of our annual report.

Can I just ask one question? Sure. And then we'll go down the line. I noted that there was a doubling of intimidation Offenses. Can you talk a little bit about what that means?

Yeah, so I think Without knowing the cases offhand, I know there were a couple of, there's a domestic and somebody's trying to call 911, for instance, and that other party involved would take the phone. that would be intimidation of a witness stopping them from calling 911. And then if there was people that were involved in previous interactions or court cases and they continue to harass or violate orders and it can be intimidation. So it's one of those things where I think it goes up and down by year. It's probably one of those years that it tended to spike upwards. Same with our arrests.

Seems like the average in the past four years was like 17, and in 2025 it was 32. It seems pretty...

There's been guidelines for domestic violence, so I think there's been an increase in training. We've received a lot more training in service. I think officers are more cognizant of and the follow-up that our community outreach officers are doing is leading to a lot of that as well.

Thank you.

I spy that, too. I was wondering, is it better reporting our cultural awareness, especially the forcible rape? Those are some pop-ups.

Yeah, some of them really jump up, including theft from a motor vehicle. And my question is, is it a theft if your car is unlocked?

Yes, it's breaking and entering. Once you open the door and enter the vehicle.

If it's not yours. Yes. Just curious. Lock your cars. Lock your cars.

They come in spurts too. They drive up and down 128. We've actually tried to stop a bunch of them and we've caught them but they take off at such high rates of speed that we have to let them go.

All right, Kathy, did you have a? Well, I want to thank you. This is a ton of work, but it's so rich and helpful to us. So I think it's wonderful. I was very happy to hear that you're close to hiring your full complement of officers. That's great news.

would you attribute that to getting off of civil service or just yes yes I think it provides us with such a broader pool and the time frame is so much faster that The time waiting up to get into the academy still takes that time, but the hiring process and getting people into the background investigation, the physical agility test, is just a couple of weeks compared to five, six months. So yeah, I think we're able to look at people that have been police officers throughout the state, but we're also able to hire off the test, which is given continuously and we can pull from that anytime that we need to. We don't have to wait for the next test, which could be a year away.

that's that's great to hear that's important and then the other thing is just sort of as a general thing you know these numbers obviously move around a lot year to year just based on individual happenstance but are there any and there's a lot of stability here but are there any trends that you're seeing or anything that you know I remember like maybe it was last year the year before there was the mailbox fishing you know that was really a thing and then there had been Unemployment Fraud in another year. Is there anything that you saw this past year or more recently that's kind of popping out?

I mean I think motor vehicle thefts were big last year I will say I think where they don't constitute motor vehicle chases because we let them go. The people know that we won't chase for the most part. And even in part of the reason if we do, and you catch them they're out the next day and they're doing the same thing so we're catching repeat offenders doing this through investigations down the road so That's why you're seeing this happening, because they're 14, 15-year-old kids coming from north of the city, coming down, stealing cars, breaking into motor vehicles, and they're taking off at high rates of speed because they know... that we can't chase. And the officers know we can't, but they also know that nothing's going to happen to them. So they don't want to put themselves in any type of position for a property crime.

and so just to be clear you're not chasing cuz at a high rate of speed that would it's dangerous it's safety it does we don't we don't chase we have a policy obviously but if it puts the the the people in danger our officers in danger the public in danger we don't very rarely there would be a circumstance that you know that would happen but it had to be fit a certain criteria

I just want to say thank you because the report's fantastic but thank you because I'm involved in a lot of committees and organizations in town and when you ever need assistance you know the The Chief, everyone is very willing and able to help us out. So I just want to personally say thank them for all they do for the town. Even something as simple as yesterday, helping us out with the Memorial Day celebration. That was great. So thank you very much.

Yeah, also, thank you. I think when I look at this report, I think it's generally positive. And I think of your most important role is prevention. And so I see the group A crimes, the most serious ones declining for the second consecutive year. And so thank you. And I think that shows that whatever you're doing is generally working. I have similar concerns as what my colleagues Kevin and Heidi mentioned about specific crimes and I'm just curious how can you Can you? Maybe there's some things that you can't do to prevent, but is there anything you can do to prevent some of these other very serious crimes like forcible rape, rape, aggravation, arson, these things that we...

it is alarming that they're increasing and I think those are you know things that kind of spike in a certain year but I will say that with our SROs, our clinician in the schools, they do a lot of work with the students all the way up and talking about safety and dating safety and domestic violence and you know sexual assaults and so forth so the the prevention is there that we're working with the other community members and stakeholders to to address that um but sometimes they just you know they happen in kind of a spurt and i don't know if there's any you know if there was something that we're seeing that we think we can get a control on and do something that we could help to get the word out there or provide some information preventative information we would do that with these that kind of

They're not related in terms of how they happened, why they happened. So there's no connectivity to them. They're separate incidents. But we try and get a base with our outreach teams and our SROs. so that they're doing that through the years.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you for the report. I too have been trying to figure out, discerning a pattern. I don't know if there is. And it seems it just goes up and down a little bit, roller coaster. I think that's an occupational hazard. The creativity of the criminal class. I am really impressed by the large number in the assortment of training you do and the accreditation. And I think the takeaway on this is how professionalized the department is. So it's really appreciated. Thank you. Marianne is not here, so I feel I'm going to speak for her. but your presence on Facebook, I'm not one to be on Facebook all the time but I am alerted sometimes and the stuff by your department, I think I wouldn't recommend every department do it in town. but somehow the department has a good voice.

It's educational, it's supportive, and I think it is a good component of community policing. So it also allows you to be active rather than reactive, so that's good. and the only other thing I would take this opportunity to mention is several people ask me, they don't like the all black cruisers. They think they're too Sith.

So, Star Wars universe. I thought you were going to say scary.

So that's just, it sort of seemed the, it's, you're hitting all these perfect notes of community policing and it's like, oh, and then the all black cruisers, which is.

I know we talked about this last year. Yeah, well. We're saving money. Okay. Let's put it that way. Because when the cars come out, you've got to paint them black and white. And then when you go to sell them, you've got to paint them back a full color again. So it's much easier to get them. What's that? I never came for the panda look. or something else. That's traditional, but we get the cars much faster and it's cheaper.

Someone will change colors and everyone will start going.

I will, are you done? Yeah, I'm good, thanks. You look like you could go for a little while. I agree. Thank you very much for this. I also want to say thank you for your work in particular. on the bylaw that we passed earlier this year with regard to federal agents and ICE activity and everything. I know that that was really important to the community and that it took a good deal of discussion to come out where we did and just want to express our appreciation for that work as well. thank you for joining us tonight.

okay so as uh noted in our public comment there has been a change in the law on cannabis and delivery so the town manager is going to tell us more about it

Yes, as was already stated earlier tonight, the governor did sign an update to the statewide cannabis laws reform law into effect. It changed a number of items, but I will just focus on the delivery piece, which the change in the law is that there already is a delivery for medical marijuana. and that's allowed in all communities and waivers cannot be sought for that. But delivery for recreational cannabis is now allowed and the implementation of the state law had it go into effect immediately. and provided municipalities who had in 2016 when the ballot question passed, communities who had voted against legalizing marijuana. those communities who followed up and created a bylaw like the town of Needham has where recreational marijuana establishments are currently prohibited under our general bylaws.

Needham does have the option whether to request a waiver to opt out of the delivery of recreational marijuana. I do want to just know I included in the memo in your packet the exact most relevant language in the statute. Just to highlight that process wise, the request of our waiver, the Cannabis Commission, it says shall grant the waiver. And that first waiver is for two years. And after that, it says that the commission may extend into year increments. continued waiver at the Commission's discretion. So the Cannabis Control Commission has issued an initial bulletin to communities just knowing that the law was going into effect right away and we should all anticipate that further guidance and potentially regulations will be forthcoming so in my mind we will know two years from now a lot more than we know currently.

But if communities do request the waiver now, my understanding is that it shall be granted for two years. So happy to answer any questions.

May I ask? If we adopt or vote to request a waiver, what is the enforcement mechanism? Should there be any illicit delivery in town?

I can ask the Cannabis Control Commission if they have like if we should report directly to them, I would just say that the town has no role in the enforcement is my understanding, but I can see clarity for what the enforcement would be. Yeah. because we don't license the establishments. But I can ask. Thank you.

And it could be any establishment in this state could deliver, right? There's none in Needham, so obviously it'd be like one in Needham.

Correct. Any licensed by the Cannabis Control Commission to operate in the state.

And I assume we'd be on a no delivery list.

Yes, the Cannabis Control Commission currently has a list of all municipalities and includes who currently has bans on brick and mortar. recreational establishments. So my presumption is that they will update that relative to delivery as well, just so that those in the industry and licensees are clear about who has a waiver and who has not.

Madam Chair, I feel very strongly that we should opt out. Town meeting spoke clearly on this to keep recreational marijuana out of the town. In my view, this state law, which I feel is badly drafted, but we're stuck with it, eviscerates our bylaw. and given that we have the option to opt out, I feel that we should opt out. So I'll move that the board vote to opt out of recreational cannabis delivery in Needham.

Second.

Okay.

Any other comments?

Totally agree.

Yeah, me too. All those in favor? Aye. Those opposed? The motion carries. All right. And now another subject that was the subject of public comment, the campus at 128 in Dedham.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So I'll give a brief overview of the current proposal and process wise. And I do want to just note, we're talking about the environmental notification form to MEPA, which is the Massachusetts Environmental Policy Act Office. Initially, when this was put on the agenda, The deadline was coming up quickly to submit comments. That has been extended to June 11th, so I would anticipate if the board wants to keep this as an ongoing agenda item. We don't have the town's final comment letter tonight for MEPA. but the campus at 128 is a proposed mixed-use development as previously mentioned in Dedham. Right near the Needham line, it is approximately 53 acres bordered by West Street, Burgess Lane, and I-85, Route 128.

And the project consists of... approximately 1.8 million square feet of development, including residential units, senior living, a hotel, lab space, and in terms of car and traffic, and others. The filing that has been submitted to MEPA is approximately 2,700 parking spaces and 14,670 daily vehicle trips. In terms of the project overall, I just want to talk a little bit about process. So the environmental notification form submitted to MEPA is required by state law because of the size and scope of the development, and it hits particular Trigger Points under state regulation for an ENF needing to be filed. We are in the comment period now and I'll talk

shortly about town departments and what we've been working on. But comments to MEPA are intended to inform what the state will require the developer to study further in the environmental impact report, so the EIR. So our comments are kind of to make sure that MEPA understands what we would like included in what's required of the developer as it goes through that EIR process, which is and the more intensive step in the MEPA process beyond the and so forth. As of last week there was not a project filed yet before the Dedham Planning Board. That is relatively common process wise in terms of for big projects starting with MEPA to give

start the process with the state, but also to use the comment period provided to all the same stakeholders for the developer to understand some of the questions concerns and comments that are on the project before then turning at some point presumably to file with the planning board and in this case that would be in Dedham. So to state the obvious, the town of Needham has no permitting role in this project. There is no kind of and the vote or approval that the town of Needham can or would need to apply to this project. our voice in this process is a very key stakeholder within the MEPA process and ultimately within the Dedham Planning Board process. and I think my understanding is they would also have to go to the Conservation Commission in Dedham as well. So in response to

being notified that the ENF was filed. We've convened all of the relevant town departments. So we have a process in place where when a large development is proposed in Needham, all the relevant departments get pulled together by our planning department. And to give folks a sense, it's police and fire, engineering, water, sewer, parks and forestry, highway, public health. I'm absolutely missing some. you know all of the elements of you know how do we use our town staff expertise to understand what a developer is proposing and what the impacts might be on the town So that meeting has been convened, and we are working to consolidate the staff's perspective on the project. primarily I just want to focus on the issue areas that are kind of jump out that may be obvious but I just want to make sure we're talking about it

traffic concerns under review and this is both impacts along Route 135 but also South Street, Webster Street, potential cut through or diversion and looking at vehicular traffic, but also pedestrian and bicycle safety. and trying to understand kind of how people would be accessing the site and what is the infrastructure currently in place or not. transit-related, the filing notes Hersey Station as the nearest public transit point, and so there's a lot of normally you know our questions with developers is you know are these they're going to be shuttle service how are we doing walking and biking to and from the site and the public transit station and

so in this case that public transit hub is is in Needham so we'll be asking for questions and analysis there. And stormwater, of course, and environmental concerns. the border between Dedham and Needham is the Charles River there. And so we will be including in our comments questions around potential downstream impacts to the Charles River watershed, flood resiliency. The project proposes a significant new amount of impervious surface and tree clearing, which we've heard about tonight. and lastly, Public Safety Concerns. We have a very robust mutual aid system. So on its face, you know, I think we have the systems in place for police and fire for developments in town. and we support our partners in other communities regularly.

So the systems are already in place, but we'll be talking and making sure that any questions or concerns from police and fire are reflected and the sorts of questions they would ask a developer if this were right over the line in Needham. So next steps for us is to finalize the comment letter which I will share with the board and you know the goal is really to articulate what are our areas of concern what would we like MEPA to require further analysis on and ultimately so that we can have an understanding of what the impacts truly are and if through the analysis we can understand if mitigation could help offset any of those impacts should the project move forward. So I know we've gotten a lot of from folks who are concerned about the project but also have questions about the process and happy to keep the board updated along the way.

particularly also once there is an application filed before the Denim Planning Board because that process would be happening in concert with the MEPA process as well. So happy to answer any questions at this point.

So when we fully understand the impacts on Needham, if any of those impacts are negative, I think it is reasonable for us to, whether it's to MEPA or the Dedham Planning Board, ask that there be conditions in a permit that satisfy our concerns. another example that I was thinking of was the The casino in Everett, Boston at the time had many concerns. They ended up actually negotiating directly with the developer for a community impact fee, recognizing that there were negative impacts on Boston and the resources. There are multiple routes to alleviating those negative impacts. I just want to make sure that we pursue all of them.

And Kathy? Yeah, I'm interested in that. My concern is our relative lack of leverage here. If they're going to Dedham for permits, you know, how do we make that negotiation work? You know what I mean? How do we get our voices heard? I mean, obviously, we're going to comment in the state process with MEPA. We're going to comment with the Debt and Planning Board, et cetera. I'm afraid we're crying into the wind. How do we get something done when they don't have to go to us for permission?

well I mean in order for their project to succeed people need to travel through Needham I think that is part of That is an assumption I'm making because I haven't read through all the documents. I think it would be in their interest to make it easier for people to travel through Needham.

I feel like a leverage is through the state, through MEPA. That's a leverage because we're part of the whole picture.

Katie, do we know if other major stakeholders in town are aware of this situation? I'm thinking, for example, of St. Sebastian's School, which is right off the highway and would have a major cut-through road directly to the site. Have we reached out to them or is that something that we could, should do to sort of have them weigh in on this as well?

Yes, I spoke with Brendan Sullivan, the head of schools at St. Sebastian's. They are aware. They are planning to submit the comments as far as I understand it. So we connected just to make sure that it was on their radar and it already had been. We certainly have heard from some neighbors and I have been in touch initially with the town manager in Dedham and My last point was just we have heard also from the Charles River Watershed who is looking at this and wanting to comment.

and then I wonder I assume that we're involving the school committee and the school department in this commentary because as we plan to it's my understanding that some of the access points now to our potential new school would be along the same road that leads to this property. And I imagine that school start times and bus times and commuter Traffic could end up being at the same time, which would potentially overburden that road to a pretty significant degree. so I'd love to at least get their impacts on our comments but potentially also I mean the school department is pretty big organization maybe they have something to say on their own as well

I think another stakeholder may be the hospital. My understanding is that they use the church parking lot as overflow parking for their employees and they have buses running back and forth.

I just feel like obviously this is a potential and yet huge potential development and so getting all of the stakeholders involved would be really beneficial.

I think I agree with Kevin though. Our best luck is going to be with MEPA going through MEPA because I'm not sure Dedham is going to listen to us as much as MEPA will. So I think it's great to get as many stakeholders as possible involved with you know comments to me but from all the stakeholders involved including us do we have like what is our standing with denim are we considered in a butter um

like a formal standing yeah yeah like legally under mass general law in 48 there's no kind of differentiating we have a lot going with them all the time and we have a lot of positive relationships and collaboration and coordination and we try to do that with everyone that shares a boundary. So no formal change of standing, but certainly we are neighbors.

So I'd hope they would listen to us.

Yeah, I know, but they... They don't have to. They don't have to. You would hope they'd be good neighbors.

Agreed. Anything else? okay thank you Katie so will we see the comments before you send them along yes our next meeting or whatever or prior to great Okay, so next item on the agenda from the town manager is Miniman.

Great. So we had a communication from Minuteman High School, our regional vocational technical school, that they have a little bit of a different budgeting process and they have have their access and deficiency funds certified for fiscal year 2026. The school committee for Minuteman took a vote and would like to appropriate $325,000 out of they are excess of 1.7 million to go towards a capital stabilization fund. Under the rules for regional school districts, The local appropriating authority has 45 days to take action and they need two thirds of the member communities to approve it.

and sorry I said to take action local appropriating authorities have 45 days to either approve it or if no action is taken that is deemed approval and So in this case, if you'll note on your fact sheet, this is a discussion item only. Town Meeting is our local appropriating authority. And so I was looking back at how we have handled these in the past and it's been an update to the board just to make sure there wasn't any questions or concerns that I could relay back but we will not have town meeting take any action in 45 days and that would be Needham's approval of this request. and I would say you know from my perspective we think it is a prudent use of the funds that benefits Needham because ultimately our assessment is for both operating and capital costs for the regional schools so to the extent that they are saving for capital costs ahead that is something that aligns with how we try to approach our capital needs as well here in town.

So I, from a town manager's perspective, don't have any concerns and think it's a good use of funds. Any questions? I will let Miniman know to wait the 45 days.

Great. All right. And then the town manager's report.

Great. Just two quick things. Speaking of Dedham Avenue, we officially have a lower speed limit. So this board had voted a few months back to Reduce the speed limit from 40 miles per hour down to 30 miles per hour. It has now been fully signed off on by the state. Signs are up and enforcement is Huffman. So a friendly reminder to folks to please take note of that new speed limit and assist for safer streets. So thank you for that. and we have many events coming up but I wanted to call out one which is on June 6th we have a community picnic here in the common from 12 to 3 and we have a live band that will be there and everyone in the community is just encouraged to go to your local restaurant, whichever is your favorite, get some takeout and come picnic on the common with us.

Amazing. Thank you.

all right uh so the next um item on our agenda is board discussion the zoning board of appeals recommended appointment and um i'm gonna turn to kathy first uh because um she has requested to take this off the consent agenda yes

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd actually like to speak to the board for a moment as a former AP government teacher. because in that role that I had for 15 years, my job was to promote civil discourse amongst my students and in fact to encourage disagreement so that they would learn. and so I feel strongly on the need for civil discourse in our town in our town institutions and I think that it really is what makes us run as a volunteer town government but I So I'd like to first define what I believe civil discourse is and is not. First, civil discourse means disagreement sort of by its definition. So disagreeing on ideas is critical. and you don't need civil discourse to agree. An agreement is not where we move forward.

We need to be able to disagree agreeably. What civil discourse is not is personal attacks and making it personal. So that's where I believe we need to draw the line. I believe strongly that the willingness, the ability to agree disagreeably to remain civil in our disagreements is a threshold qualification for being on any committee in town. Policymaking, not policymaking, it doesn't matter. And there's two main reasons for that. The first is that having civility on our committees is what facilitates disagreement. And this I can speak to personally from my experience as an AP government teacher. People are scared to express their views when they think they're going to be in the minority. And you actually really have to encourage that.

And if people think that they may be personally attacked, they will not share those views. So the extent to which we want and I want, I think we all want minority views to come out in our committees, we need to have an environment that is civil and safe for people to express those views. and I think when we don't have minority views coming out that's when we miss things so I think civility is this is sort of an counterintuitive thing but civility is actually critical for productive disagreement and then the second thing I would say is we are a all-volunteer of Government. We have many, many volunteers, several hundred on our committees. And these are people who are working hard all day in their jobs. And then they're coming in the evening and working hard more and, you know, We need to encourage people to do that.

And if they're going to be personally criticized, are treated in some way that it is not civil, they're not going to want to do it. And right now, we are lucky. We have many great people who want to serve on our committees. We always have more people who want to serve than we have spots, and that is wonderful. But if they perceive it as toxic, unpleasant, et cetera, they're not going to want to serve. So for that reason, I think that civility and civil discourse are absolutely crucial. are critical on all of our committees and I think an ability and a willingness to be consistently civil is a threshold qualification. and I would move that the board vote to not appoint Zachary Wallach to serve as an associate member on the Zoning Board of Appeals for a term to expire on June 30th, 2027.

I infer that you think the applicant is not civil. Is that true?

what I'll just say is I don't I feel strongly that we do not on the select board want to speak about individual candidates that this would have a major chilling effect on our ability to recruit people. And so I don't wish to discuss an individual nominee.

But I think that's what we're doing right now. I think if the objection is not on qualifications or on process if there is an objection on on person if it's personality if it's character i think it has to be voiced i mean i i I agree with your sentiment and what you said but I don't see how it's applicable to this applicant and I don't see the connection between the motion and what you just said.

Are there any other comments?

Was the motion seconded? uh not yet not yet so we're just going to continue discussion is that unless you'd like to second i don't want a second though I spoke to the applicant today. I'm impressed by his knowledge, his background. I don't know of any of You know, I think Ms. Dowd mentioned personal attacks. I don't know anything about anything about that. I know the chairman, he spoke to the chairman of the Zoning Board of Appeals, and he seemed to think he would be a good member of the Zoning Board of Appeals. So I would be in favor of a point exact to the zoning board of appeals because I don't know any reason really not to. I think he's qualified. I don't know about... you know, the civil discourse, I think, or the personal attacks, I'm just not aware of that, that would keep me from voting for him, unfortunately, or fortunately, I don't know which one it is.

Okay.

Kevin? I think this process is a bit off the rails and the process is that if A recommendation is made but someone on the board has reservations. Those reservations are respected. You don't have to show receipts. You can just say, in my considered opinion, I don't want this person. So there it ends. I think to sort of bring it to the board is sort of it puts The candidate in an awkward spot, it puts people who also applied for this position in an awkward spot because they're now finding it out in the strangest way that they possibly weren't nominated.

and I think what we do is respect what our colleagues on the board want which is to not move forward with this appointment so that's sort of the process I think I would defer to Kathy's authority and expertise and her opinion. And that's sort of the process we have on this committee. That's how we do things. That's never been established. it's yeah it actually has been established because of past practice so that's how we do things on this committee on this board and I think we just defer and say If someone has reservations, we honor that reservation.

Kevin, I've had reservations in the past, and that is not the process that has happened before.

I don't think that has happened.

If someone has a problem we would defer to that person. So that's how it has happened.

I guess I'm worried here that we're setting a precedent about discussing individuals, which I think is inappropriate to do in public. Well, I understand there are open meeting considerations, et cetera. I also don't want this to turn this discussion or to become character assassination or to set a precedent for having this kind of discussion that could hurt somebody. our volunteers are very important to the functioning of the town. And to keep our volunteers whole, I think it's really important that we protect their Privacy. And it's really hard for me to understand how we can do that and have the kind of conversation that you're requesting.

Just to be clear, I did not request this conversation. I believe other members requested this conversation.

other members were not comfortable. So they took it off of consent. But I do think that the This discussion needs to not hinge on any particular volunteer or their fitness for the position for which they are a candidate, I think it needs to hinge on whether or not the board agrees.

Could I speak, please? Because this is about me. No, no.

This is a board discussion. That's why you had public comment earlier.

I understand your desire to... Can I just address some things that have been said?

Mr. Wallach, this is not an open conversation. This is not a public hearing. And so I will ask you to sit, please.

I think this is about a specific individual. And that is the danger. So you've outlined a particular danger. I think the worst danger is, that any member of this board has a veto based upon perceived character flaws in an individual that cannot be defended.

You know, I wouldn't say it's a veto, but I'd say it's a courtesy. and I think you respect it and you honor it. If someone has a concern, understood. And it has been that way since I've been on board. and it's happened that people that was you know one of the roles we have is a priority of discretion to not advance candidates who we don't want them and it works because we respect people's privacy and we just move on.

So that's it. I wish I could agree with you, Kevin, but I don't agree just because one person Without knowing more, and it's hard, like you said, because we don't want to go through this whole real process with the person, but without knowing more, it's very hard for me to just rely on...

what I heard this evening um okay so I mean and I guess that's why we have a vote right we'll have a vote but I'd also say sometimes that's why you have on a five-person board you know it's 10 years listening in ten ten perspective or five perspectives um and so you hear and you know people and people know people in the town and that's how it works it's um it's a different perspective and you hear from people and I think in the past we've always just honored that. So I guess I would second Cathy's motion that we not appoint.

Is there any more discussion?

Can I ask another question? Is there a process concern with the way appointments are being done?

Are you asking me? Yeah. Yeah. One is I'm concerned that The staff is not being used or there's no staff assist on the interviews. I am still concerned there's no chair of a committee on the interviews, but that's not one on the bridge. is irregular that we got the list from Miles saying who you nominated. But then we got an email from the candidate you nominated sort of lobbying for the picture and making an offer. And that has never happened. It's not happened because first, there's discretion that the board members allow to sort of weigh your consideration.

and all of a sudden you contacted the candidate and said they were, it seems to me, this is the time I'm piecing it together, the person you nominated, you told, and that didn't go through the town process. and then that town, then that.

I want to interrupt for one second and I apologize because I can see that you're in the middle. Right now, what is under consideration is this particular appointment. and not the process. So I want to separate those two items because we don't have a discussion of the process, the appointment process on our agenda. I don't think it's something we should be discussing without that. So certainly we could put it on a future agenda. We could discuss it in the future. But for this particular discussion, I think we have to confine ourselves to what is on the agenda.

That's fair. The reason why I asked is because I have heard no clear objection to the applicant. And I get the sense that there are other objections that are not stated. Perhaps Kevin was getting to some of them with the process. But I have yet to hear something that is objectionable about the applicant.

But I think part of that, again, is this concept that it is not appropriate to have that kind of conversation.

Then I don't know what anyone would be basing their votes on if they voted to support Kathy's motion.

I understand that.

but even the public. I'm not talking just about us. The public would have no idea. How is a member of the public going to feel confident applying for a position to this board when they know that they can be vetoed for any reason, including questions about their character, and they would have no ability to defend themselves against that.

Well, I think that we do need to look at what our process is because, as Kevin stated, there seems to have been a departure from past practice. Now, past practice may not be the policy. But it is established nonetheless. No. It is established nonetheless. And if we're going to make changes to our practice... and not everything can be captured in policy as we know then if we're going to make changes to our practice then we need to work through that. Unfortunately, the request, I think in this case, was met with resistance. The request to discuss this candidate was met with some resistance and resulted in taking it off of consent to address that. But I am still unwilling personally to discuss

Anything. having to do with an individual's character or fitness for the position in public. I don't think that's appropriate. So given that, this is where we stand. So ultimately, without making this a larger conversation because what is on the agenda is this particular vote I think we should there is a motion on the floor and it is seconded so I think we should move to that

So in response to the process questions that you raised, we all acknowledge that the process was changing because of the open meeting law violation.

I don't think that those are the process changes that I'm referring to.

And so any other processes were never communicated to me. So this is the thing. It is quite often that some of my colleagues will refer to established processes that are not communicated to other members of the board.

Okay, in the past, you have raised concerns about previous appointments and they were discussed and dealt with prior to an issue like this coming off consent. so I'd be happy to discuss those in the past so that you know in a discussion of process but that's not what we're doing right now so I'm just going to insist that we take process and separate it from the vote that's in front of us. But I would be happy to have a conversation in the future, either. Well, actually, I would say that it would be difficult to do in a public meeting because again in past examples

which we have I would not want to mention individuals right so I'd be happy to to try and navigate that with you so that we can have a fuller discussion but I don't believe it's something that we can do in public because I do not want to mentioned specific individuals.

So I just want to be clear that the concern is not about process, it is about this particular individual.

no no no no we have two we have two issues one is this this motion in front of us and then one is deviations from past practice, which have helped us to avoid situations like discussions that come off consent about particular individuals. So I think those are two separate things The one is on our agenda tonight and one is not. And so the one that's on our agenda is the one that I'm willing to take to a vote, but not to discuss further. The other is something that we're going to have to figure out a way to discuss. and I'm not exactly sure how we should do that but it's a conversation that we will have.

I am still unclear what the objection is to this candidate.

I can hear that that is the case but I'm not certain that we have a way to resolve that issue right now. I think it would be by voicing the objections There's a motion on the floor If anyone else has any other comments, now is the time. Otherwise, we're going to move to a vote. Okay. In terms of the motion on the floor, all those in favor?

The motion is to not appoint, right?

The motion was to not appoint, correct. So those in favor of not appointing, Please say aye. Aye. And those against?

Nay. Okay.

All right, thank you. That's three to two. OK, the next item on our agenda is a board discussion of committee reports. Bill, do you want to get us started?

I just went to the Needham 100. that's not really a committee, official committee of the town, but Dina Krieger and Avery Johnson started this. They had a meeting at the library to come up with 100 ideas to do with Needham. it was great great attendance there was a lot of ideas and i think they're going to be starting or have already started a non-profit to help so the funds won't be coming from the town to do a lot of these ideas so it was it was really fun and exciting night and to see everyone there excited about things and really come together as a community great

Anything else?

I also enjoyed yesterday, my first Memorial Day, going through the whole, in spite of the rain, after Vietnam, it was a great day. So I enjoyed that.

yes i was i felt the only one appropriately dressed but you all managed admirably memorial day was wonderful it was a very good event um and i congratulate my colleagues on their speeches it was very nice as well

Thank you. Kevin?

I went to the Charles River Chamber of Commerce breakfast. Monster.com founded Jeff Taylor spoke. Greg Riemann throws a good breakfast. He's a good cook. It was actually really interesting. It was very good. I also went to the DPW Appreciation Cookout. Makes me think I just eat a lot. But they really know how to cook a burger. It was great. And it was great to see the crew and all those people. And it was nice to say thank you to them all. Strange story. I was at the Needham Community Farm seedling sale and a woman there who's a Newman parent and a Newtown meeting member and her kids are in third grade and she said, oh, you guys just had town meetings, did the town seal. Well, the third graders at Newman were learning about Needham history and they were learning about the seal and they were learning about town meeting.

so lo and behold she comes in with a video of town meeting and the presentation about this town seal and then town meeting voting on the seal and the curriculum ranked itself. So it was great. It just all connected. It was very nice. All right.

Very good. Kathy? I'll just second or fifth the Memorial Day celebrations. This is one of my very favorite things that we get to do as the Left Board members, the walk from the cemetery to the center and then to Memorial Park. just gets me every time. It's just spectacular. And being with all the veterans and hearing their experiences is very moving every year. I also went very briefly to the DPW cookout, which was awesome. And actually, I have questions that we have to I have to follow up on but really appreciated talking to mostly the guys and I didn't get a burger because I had to run back for a meeting which was a bummer but it was

and then of course the tree committee met our last meeting and well I guess this was our last meeting but our last official policy meeting so that was really good work

Madam Chair, if I could add one thing to the exchange club each year. gives it a warm call. So proudly we hail for people who display their flag throughout the community. Usually it's a resident in their business. This year they've decided to give it to a resident and then the RTS because they display their proud self. proudly there, if you notice over by the building. And they also were seeing a lot of flags thrown out improperly. because they're supposed to be burned, you know. So now they have a collection bin. They have one at the VFW, but now they also have a collection bin for the flags as well. So they will be honored at the Exchange Club meeting on June 4th, right? June 4th. So I just wanted to add that.

excellent okay um and with that i think uh i'd welcome a motion so moved to adjourn so soon Is there a second? Second. All right. All those in favor? Aye.

Recording stopped.